PSoTD

Interesting review. As long as it doesn't rain tomorrow night, we're going to see it at the drive-in, along with Get Smart.

I wonder if anyone ever looks for the old California Journal anymore.

I see that Lanny Davis is going through his Liebermanism. Such is the way of all rejected whiners of the Democratic Party, as they are rejected as damaged BECAUSE OF THEIR WHINING, they take it to the one network, voice of the one party, that excels in reframing whining as some sort of legitimate political dialogue - Fox News of the Republican Party.

Good on ya, Lanny. Now even those who didn't notice your performances before on various news outlets can see you for what you really are.

Everyone has a magazine now, except for us Underachievers of our Generation. But I'm waiting to subscribe to UOOG Magazine, which I fervently hope will be chock full of pictures.

Fun little event, 29 different acts performed by elementary school kids. One comedian, one juggler, two magic acts, and a whole slew of singing and dancing performances. Here's the biggest thing I learned last night:

Miley Cyrus owns the elementary girl marketplace, at least around here. There were five - FIVE - performances done to her songs, all different songs, and all girl performers. How do I know they were Miley Cyrus? I knew a couple of the songs, but my daughter told me there were five. She's a fan too, she knows.

Here's what I learned this morning: The official Miley Cyrus websites kinda bother me. I didn't stay to figure out why, but I guess I think it's too "Tiger Beat" magazine of a web site. I know, it's not for me...

I bet this site makes Chris Matthews jealous.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

For whatever purpose or for whoever's candidacy, Lanny Davis is a poor choice to go on as a representative. He somehow manages to provide a general overtone of whining regardless of the topic he's speaking about. Add to that the atmosphere of boredom that seems to develop when he speaks, and you have yourself a talking head that can't get the job done well.

This would be even funnier except that it could practically be a transcript.

Except for the fact that I think Howard Fineman plays along a lot more than that...

AOL put out a list of the top 50 comedies of all time. I took a look at it, I don't have any major gripes, except these shows I don't think belong AT ALL in this listing of the top 50 TV Comedies of All Time...

7. The Cosby Show
43. The Golden Girls
49. Newhart

Some of the other comedies I haven't seen, so I don't feel knowledgable enough to have a preference, but these three shows I have seen enough of, and frankly, I don't get it. I would have thrown Maude in the bunch too, but I didn't want to seem like a Bea Arthur hater, plus Adrienne Barbeau, although not funny, was why a lot of males watched anyways.

I won't quibble about order, either, since it's so subjective anyways.

And now for some love for three TV comedies that weren't listed that should have been:

Leave it to Beaver
The Andy Griffith Show
Bewitched
The Tracey Ullman Show - if for no other reason, because it lead to The Simpsons.

Okay, I take it back. Maude goes off the list.

I know - Leave it to Beaver? Like I said, it's subjective, and there was a time my brothers and friends watched the syndicated reruns of that show. And laughed. That Eddie Haskell, he was a character.

Get back to me when Chris Matthews feeds hungry people for three decades.

Whoever are the leaders of the local religious institution that the following people choose to attend, I would like to see the RWSL* applied to them.

Chris Matthews
Nedra Pickler
Tim Russert
Wolf Blitzer
Charlie Gibson

Oh, and of course, John McCain.

Apparently this is the new cool thing in political reporting. So spread it around!

*Reverend Wright Scrutiny Level

Apparently Reverend Jeremiah Wright has announced his candidacy for President or something like that.

Pat Robertson didn't get this much attention when he arose from the dead. He did, didn't he?

Will there be a "Rock of Love 3"?

Fill in the blank: I would rather _________________________ than be subjected to another half-thought from John Fund.

I know, I'm not Catholic, but what possible "news" reasoning could there be for both CNN and MSNBC to televise the Yankee Stadium Mass today?

I wonder if Benny Hinn, Thomas Monson, Frank Page and others are curious how they could get such coverage, also...

The last Don and Mike Show aired last Friday. I guess you'd call them B-Team shock jocks. Syndicated out of WJFK in Washington they were broadcast on fifty-or-so mostly mid-market stations. I'd been listening here in Harrisburg since around 1990. I believe I heard them the first time on 93.5 FM but most of the last twenty years they've spent on AM talkers, ultimately finding a drive-time home on 1350 out of York. No signal up here after dark.

Don's wife was killed in a nightmare car crash outside of Ocean City in 2005. She was an integral part of the show. Incredibly, Don went back on the radio in less than a month. His first show back was simply heart-wrenching. He was always willing to bare every emotion on radio. That's a large part of what made the show great.

But he never really made it back emotionally and has now decided to hang it up for a while. Mike continues on. His solo show is different but has been unexpectedly good in the first week. (1350 AM 3-7 PM)

Here's the song Don chose to open their last show. Perfect as usual.

Atrios points out that a lot of bloggers seem to be saying that Obama had a rough night last night. Frankly, I don't think the debate is going to play out that way. I think the audience, in general, is going to weigh the Symbiotic Dipshittery coming from the news media and how it impacted the questions last night, and walk away with a general sense that regardless of how the candidates responded, there was almost nothing right in how that debate was run.

I say now that the debate was at worst a wash for Obama. Clinton may have a slightly better performance on some of the questions, but it's hidden in the glare of the craven moderators of ABC, who long to be seen important in the context of Washington's Hollywood Expose crowd.

First of all, why would any Democrat really care about Bobo's review of the debate? He's going to support McCain in the general editorially anyways, so of course he's going to find ways to trash the candidates.

But his review of how to moderate a debate? I disagree with this premise:

I understand the complaints, but I thought the questions were excellent. The journalist’s job is to make politicians uncomfortable, to explore evasions, contradictions and vulnerabilities.

I don't think that's it at all. I think the journalist's job is to dig for information that will be of use to the public, and in a political debate, of use to the public for their participation in civic decision-making. That could be what Brooks is describing, but only if the areas of exploration are of value.

Brooks is stressing technique over everything else in the debate, and I guess I just don't think that's the top priority for most Americans. Most Americans want content - technique is secondary to the delivery of the goods. To the degree of delivering content, ABC failed in an appalling way. ABC deserves an F, but a very special F, the kind where you have to go back and take the class over again in order to participate in the final project, because they not only ran a debate where they didn't understand the most important premise, but they did it on perhaps the final debate before the nomination is determined. ABC could not have picked a worse time to be this horrible.

Search as I may, I don't see either of these two men wearing flag pins! TRAITORS!!!!!

Listen to this morning’s “Meet the Press” if you want an example. Tim Russert, one of the smartest guys on television...

Ouch.

NBC Meet The Press

MEET THE PRESS WITH TIM RUSSERT WEEKEND LISTINGS 4/13/08

JAMES CARVILLE Democratic Strategist

MARY MATALIN Republican Strategist

MIKE MURPHY Republican Strategist

BOB SHRUM Democratic Strategist

I wonder, if you morphed all four of these people together, would the result turn you to stone?

Once again about the Washington Post's priority for important stories. I don't blame James Carville for having the kind of personality that desires attention from all at all times, but I don't understand why the Washington Post thinks that what he has to say in this writeup would interest anyone at all. Who cares?

America survives because Abraham Lincoln didn't have a thousand twits blathering about his every word.

The Sacramento Bee now has a place where Californians can do that. I was able to find out what a few of my friends make that are employed by the state. But I'm really not sure how the searchability of salary of state employees really helps the general public. What's the practical value of this, other than allowing people to rummage around and find out the base salary of their acquaintances?

All employers, whether they be public or private, profit or nonprofit, pay employees with a variety of devices - base salary, bonuses, overtime, benefits, etc. Focusing on one without incorporating the whole package seems very piecemeal. Doing it without including a job description, rather than just a title, seems piecemeal as well.

Having said all that, I'm surprised at how low a lot of the base salaries for state employees seem to be for a relatively expensive housing market such as California...

Most people don't read blogs, magazines, newspapers, toilet paper packaging, you name it, most people don't read it.

No disrespect to hairless typists in particular, but I think I can generally say with a high degree of confidence that most National Review "writers" have the likeable qualities that God gave leeches.

Well, at least as with as much confidence as I have in the writer linked.

Jim Brady, Executive Editor of Washingtonpost.com, was asked the following question:

At this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, a panel of futurists claimed that print newspapers wouldn't exist by 2014. To what extent do you agree with this?

Statements that broad are bound to be wrong. The Washington Post will absolutely exist in 2012, as will other big newspapers like The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. I do think you're already seeing midsized and smaller papers deciding to go the Web-only route. If you look at current online revenues, all newspaper companies are still struggling to make money on the Web. But since the publishing costs online are microscopic compared to print, and with newsprint costs going up many newspapers are figuring they can save a lot of money by going online-only.

Again, such a broad statement is absolutely wrong. But there will be a lot of newspapers in the next 5 years that go web-only, in the US at least.

The question was about 2014, Brady assured only that the Washington Post would be around in 2012. Hmmmm.

Timmy Russert needs new friends. Can't somebody introduce him to some new and interesting people? Maybe he should join Toastmasters and mingle. I hear they serve real chocolate desserts there.

MEET THE PRESS WITH TIM RUSSERT
WEEKEND LISTINGS 3/2/08

JAMES CARVILLE
Democratic Strategist

MARY MATALIN
Republican Strategist

MIKE MURPHY
Republican Strategist

BOB SHRUM
Democratic Strategist

He's evolving as a journalist and as a questioner. He's 90 percent there... to being the William Shatner of debates. Answer me!

I have to say that last night, for the first time that I can ever remember, Saturday Night Live seemed a bit like a TV show for New Yorkers. Even though Tina Fey's bit about Hillary Clinton was kind of funny, the point is, she was also shilling for a candidate on the program. It's not that I wouldn't expect SNL to be rooting for Clinton - after all, they are in New York City and she's their U.S. Senator. But I would think they could be more subtle about it.

On the other hand, I quit watching SNL regularly a long time ago because they had lost their subtlety, and because in the past 10 years, at their very, very best, they could only achieve kind of funny. It is amazing that for over a decade, SNL has been unable to accomplish comedy at a weekly level reaching what The Daily Show or Conan O'Brien has done on a daily level. They get more time, and somehow, that time is wasted every week on horrible sketches and forgettable performers. It is time for NBC to give somebody else a chance at that time slot, and quit wasting it on a 21st Century Ed Sullivan Show.

Must be the news media's new favorite word of choice.

Peggy Noonan will surprise you, and suggest that somebody else is a snob. Really! Has she ever listened to herself speak? It's usually one of the first things that comes to mind when I hear her.

My name is Andrew Romano Eleanor Clift, and I'm going to ride the Loch Ness Monster to the North Pole so Santa can perform the wedding rights for me and Cinderella Prince Charming.

Note: My apologies to Andrew Romano. Eleanor Clift was the culprit of this article, and I didn't even notice it. I should have my blogging card taken away for 30 days. That was awful blogging.

One of the things that might make sense to study by a journalism or communications department at some highly appreciated university would be the blog links to various publications, and whether they increase or decrease over time. This would have to be somehow compared by taking a large population of blogs over time, maintaining a total population number to publication links for various time periods, and then measuring a percentage per publication of those links. In the political world, for example, the entire blogging spectrum would need to be covered, and the entire online political publication community should be measured.

My suspicion is that Slate would have a very ominous downward trend, because of newsworthiness and interest level in the quality of the articles.